Though
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin seem to agree on a number of issues, there is
one they apparently don't see eye to eye on. While Trump argues that Hillary
Clinton is too weak to be president of the United States, the Russian President
appears to be genuinely afraid of Clinton.
Evidence
is growing that Russia is actively working to undermine Clinton's presidential
prospects. When hackers released the emails of the Democratic National
Committee just hours before the Democratic National Convention, internet
security specialists found the fingerprints of Russian agencies. Then came the
latest hacks of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.
The
US government has now formally accused Russia of interfering in the US
elections, and every instance of interference so far is clearly aimed at
harming the Democratic candidate.
It's
easy to see why Putin fears Clinton. While the Trump campaign is trying to get
voters to focus on Clinton stumbling and coughing, Putin sees her as a real
threat to his objectives.
For
Putin, stopping Clinton is not only an important strategic goal. It is also
personal.
Back
in 2011, Putin faced the biggest protests the country had seen since the
collapse of the Soviet Union. He had served two terms as president, the maximum
allowed, and in 2008 had become prime minister, in a maneuver that allowed him
to effectively hold power while his ally, Dmitry Medvedev, was president. Then
he announced -- to much anger, but little surprise -- that he would seek a
third term as president. Three months later, the opposition erupted in fury
when his party won a landslide victory in legislative elections amid
allegations of fraud.
Despite
the frigid Moscow temperatures, thousands massed in the streets calling for
fair elections and for an end to Putin's seemingly endless rule. Signs and
chants declared, "Putin is a thief!" Putin's hold on power faced a
genuine threat. Then-Secretary of State Clinton openly sided with the
protesters. "The Russian people, like people everywhere," she said,
"...deserve free, fair, transparent elections."
Putin
was fuming. He blamed the protests on Clinton, accusing her of sending "a
signal" to the opposition.
Putin's
personal animosity toward Clinton coincides with his larger strategic goals. In
recent years, he has launched an increasingly muscular foreign (and domestic)
policy. He is challenging the US, NATO and the European Union at every turn.
Despite a shrinking economy -- not much bigger than Mexico's -- Russia has used
its military power to make it a major player on the global stage.
How
Russian hackers could influence the election 02:30.
Russia,
according to Western analysts, has mounted a campaign to "discredit the
West's liberal democratic model, and undermine trans-Atlantic ties,"
manipulating Eastern European countries and "supporting the far
right" against the EU. That "Kremlin Playbook" includes
tampering with elections in Europe and the US.
Clinton
stands in direct defiance to Putin's vision, already partly in place, of a
Russia with a sphere of influence that includes the former Soviet territory
and, more loosely, Eastern Europe, alongside a weakened Europe, US and NATO.
In
contrast to Trump, she has made countless comments over the years to suggest
she would present a much tougher opponent to Putin's ambitions than Barack
Obama has been, saying she thinks the United States must find ways to
"confine, contain, [and] deter Russian aggression in Europe and
beyond."
While
Clinton looks poised to toughen America's stance, Trump's foreign policy
coincides with Russia's. He has suggested he might recognize Russia's
annexation of Crimea, which Putin captured by force from Ukraine; he might
suspend economic sanctions against Russia; and would align his policies in
Syria with Putin and Assad.
During
the Republican primaries, Clinton came under fire for leading the Obama
administration's failed diplomatic "reset" with Russia. But the
former US ambassador to Moscow, Mike McFaul, said she was deeply skeptical that
the plan would bear fruit.
Once
out of office, her criticism of Russia became cutting.
When
Putin justified Russia's 2014 takeover of Crimea as an effort to protect
Russian minorities there, Clinton said it was reminiscent of Hitler's
justification for taking over parts of Eastern Europe. Putin later commented
that Clinton has "never been too graceful in her statements."
Clinton
was implicitly critical of Obama's restrained response, saying, "I am in
the category of people who wanted us to do more in response to the annexation
of Crimea and the continuing destabilization of Ukraine."
And
just as Putin targeted her by name, she, too, has gone after him personally. In
a speech last year, she said, "I remain convinced that we need a concerted
effort to really up the costs on Russia and in particular on Putin."
The
most urgent item on the foreign policy agenda for both the United States and
Russia is the civil war in Syria. There, the Trump campaign has offered
conflicting ideas, but in the most recent debate Trump seemed to stand with
Putin.
While
Obama has maintained an extremely restrained approach to the crisis, sending
Secretary of State John Kerry to multiple, so far useless, diplomatic marathons
with his Russian counterpart even as Russia continues bombing civilians in
support of Assad, Clinton sounds determined to impose a no-fly zone, which
would defy not only Syria's army but also Russia.
She
says she would keep the Russians informed, so no clashes occur, adding "I
want them at the table," but it is a sharp departure from the current
policy, and one that must sound deeply disturbing to Putin.
A
few years ago, Putin mused, speaking about Clinton, that "It's better not
to argue with women." It's clear now why he's going to great lengths to
avoid having to argue with a President Hillary Clinton.
Frida
Ghitis is a world affairs columnist for the The Miami Herald and World Politics
Review, and a former CNN producer and correspondent. The views expressed in
this commentary are her own.
